Skip to main content

About your Search

20130126
20130203
STATION
CSPAN 13
MSNBC 12
MSNBCW 12
CSPAN2 4
LANGUAGE
English 51
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 51 (some duplicates have been removed)
or incorrect when you said that the surge would be the most dangerous foreign policy blunder in this country since vietnam? were you correct or incorrect? >> my -- >> yes or no. >> my reference -- >> can you answer the question, senator hagel? the question is, were you right or wrong? that's a pretty straightforward question. >> well -- >> i would like to answer whether you were right or wrong, and then you are free to elaborate. >> well, i'm not going to give you a yes or no answer -- >> well, let the record show you refused to answer this question. now, please go ahead. >> if you would like me to explain why -- >> i actually would like an answer. yes or no. >> well, i'm not going to give you a yes or no. i think it's far more complicated than that, as i have already said. my answer is i'll defer that judgment to history. as to the comment i made about the most dangerous foreign policy decision since vietnam was about not just the surge but the overall war of choice going into iraq. >> i think history has already made a judgment about the surge, sir, and you're on the wrong side of it. >> s
think this speech given last night by this president represents the most dangerous foreign policy blunder in this country since the vietnam. if it is carried out, i will resist it." the question continued on for months and months talking about what a disaster the surge would be even when it was clear the surge was succeeding. in march 2008, you said "the term quagmires could apply. some reject that term, but if that is not a quagmire, what is? even as late as august 29, 2011, in an interview with the "financial times" -- you said i disagree with president obama and his decision to surge in iraq as i did with president obama. do you stand by those comments? >> senator, i stand by them because i made them. >> were you right? where you write in your assessment? >> i would defer to the judgment of history to assert -- to sort that out. >> the committee deserves to know whether you are right or wrong about the search. >> i will explain why -- >> i want to know if you are right or wrong. it's a direct question. >> the surge assisted in the objective. >> will you please answer the questi
are these senators today really arguing about president bush and president obama on foreign policy? >> they were, rev. and it was like neocon 101. they were relitigating the iraq war. the iraq war that had nothing to do with 9/1. the iraq war that diverted our attention from bringing bin laden to justice and just about $3 trillion. i mean, it's time to start nation-building at home. and i will tell you, chuck hagel, today should have been a historic day because he's the first enlisted man ever to become secdef. secretary of defense. now let me tell you something, too, they're trying to make him look weak. but look at what happened in 1999. chuck hag ergs l always puts his country first. muslims were getting murdered. it was the worst ethnic cleansing in europe since germany. and then president clinton said we're going to send our men and women into kosovo. he's one of only two republicans to do that. the man wears his heart on his sleeve for his country. they try to dishonor him. but he, you know, listen, he's been through a lot worse in his life than given a hard time. >> john, the thing that amazed
with cutbacks to the u.s. stockpile as a means to draw russia into negotiations, foreign policy magazine reported, ahead of the unannounced discussions. the house subcommittee chairman mike rogers asks if they have assurances as to what is going on there. i would note that last year's defense authorization villepin -- bill calls for briefings on his discussions to the congress, the servant -- the armed services committee and subcommittee. it does not less than twice each year, the president or his designee will brief the committee on foreign relations and the committee on armed services about the dialogue between the u.s. and the russian federation on issues of limits or controls of nuclear arms, missile defense system, and long-range conventional strike systems. the deadline for that would be march 2 this year. my first question to you, if confirmed, will you honor that request as part of the mdaa? >> the request for the briefing? >> yes, the requirements for the briefing. will you keep congress advise on any discussions dealing with national defense and dialogue with russia on national
he is going to give his manifesto on what republican foreign policy should be. that's going to be next week on ronald reagan's birthday, rand paul. but, you know, it's fitting, because we're coming up on reagan's birthday. and did you hear about the horrible obama muslim marxist thing about his kenyan home? did you hear? >> this is one wall that probably shouldn't be torn down. this apartment building used to be the home of a young ronald reagan. it was denied landmark status, and the university of chicago is ready to demolish it. the university is also trying to become the site of president obama's presidential library. that's drawing strong concerns the university might turn president reagan's former house into a parking lot for an obama library. >> did you hear about that? chicago close ties with the obamas, all of them, tearing down ronald reagan's boyhood home in order to make a parking lot for barack obama's presidential library. did you hear? did you hear? see, here it is on drudge. reagan's home could become parking lot for obama library. here it is on something call
with the mainstream of u.s. foreign and defense policy and also with president obama. chuck hagel believes we must preserve the american strength as a force for good in the world. he recognizing that protecting our interests requires strong allies and friends, as well as strong american leadership. third, chuck has the depth of experience and leadership skills required to handle this tough job. there is no shortage of security challenges around the world, as this committee knows and as you enumerated this morning, mr. chairman. a very large and impressive group of former cabinet officials and public servants from both sides of the aisle have said that they trust chuck hagel with this important responsibility. and i strongly, i strongly agree. fourth, on the fiscal side, i am will be athat chauck powerful advocate for a common- sense approach in this administration and on capitol hill regarding fiscal challenges to the defense budget. he understands that our defense capabilities are being threatened on two budget friends. first, sequestration, with its damaging, across the board, up from the budget
of a foreign-policy think tank. at his confirmation hearing today, he had some back and forth with former colleagues, including senator john mccain. that exchange is about an hour and a half into the hearing. later, we will get your thoughts about the nomination and hearing on our phone lines at 11:00 p.m. eastern, 8:00 pacific. carl levin chairs the armed services committee and makes the opening statement. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2013] >> good morning, everybody. the committee meets today to consider the nomination of former senator chuck hagel to be secretary of defense. before i begin, i want to first welcome senator inhofe as the new ranking republican on our committee, succeeding senator mccain. senator mccain has been a great partner over the past six years, and i thank him for all the work he has done to get bills enacted, his leadership on a host of issues, his support for the work of this committee, and for always keeping our hearings likely. -- lively. senator inhofe has shown his strong commitmen
the president in the countries foreign policy debates -- mr. kerry in the state department, mr. hagel at the pentagon, and mr. mccain, will all derive a substantial part of their legitimacy from vietnam experiences. mr. mccain's relationship with mr. kerr it isy the striking tale of the lingering influence of the vietnam. more than a decade later, mccain traveled to massachusetts to campaign against mr. kerry. yet the pair worked so closely in the cause of reviving relations with vietnam that they became friends. when mr. kerry appeared at a senate confirmation hearing last week, he was introduced by mr. mccain, who praised his ' exemplary statesmanship.' mr. mccain's relationship with mr. hagel what has gone the opposite way. 'i admire him and consider is friendship to be a treasure of inestimable value to me,' mr. mccain said in 2001. by the time mr. mccain became the presidential candidate and to designate, the relationship had cooled. mr. hagel refused to endorse 'm, telling 'the new yorker' we so fundamentally disagree on our future course of our foreign policy and our role in th
security hawk. very knowledgeable about foreign policy. he is a, wish there were a better term for this, he's a social conservative. that term will have to do. and he's a hell of a guy. ladies and gentlemen, the new senator from texas, r, and capital r, rafael ted cruz. \[applause] >> thank you so much. jay has been a dear friend a long, long time. i told jay please -- you know this past week was a momentous week -- oh, i need a mike? hello, hello. >> as they said in the 20 70 campaign, help is on the way. \[laughter] so when the mike wasn't working i told all sorts of embarrassing secrets about jay nordlinger and i trust all of you got them in full lurid detail. this past week has been a momentous week. president obama was sworn in to a second term. i guess what made the news is beyonce apparently lip synced throughout the inaugural. not as widely reported was the fact that president obama did as well. who knew that his teleprompter could play music? we saw this week an ode to liberalism, unabashed, unapologetic, i have to say sitting there it occurred to me somewhere the sea must be risin
the understanding of the world of the foreign policy choices facing this country. today we are continuing what we have come to call secretary of state we cure the council. on tuesday night we were fortunate to hear from george shultz, who served as secretary of state for some six and a half years under president ronald reagan. and this afternoon we are honored to host hillary rodham clinton. during her last 24 hours as president obama's for secretary of state, immediately afterwards i'm told she might be expected to party like it's cartagena all over again. [laughter] we did our research and this is the eighth time that hillary clinton has spoken at the council and her third appearance in her current incarnation as secretary of state. and his afternoon speech is probably the most anticipated one she has given here and it may be the most anticipated farewell address since 1796. [laughter] i suspect though that her views on entangling alliances might be somewhat different than george washington's. much as been made of the mile she has put in as the country 67 secretary of state. you have seen a sta
-- and so you've had a lot to say about foreign policy. you've also had a thing or two to say about the republican position on taxes and a number of other issues. so i wonder, is your view that republicans need to get right on foreign policy and can that that is really a core issue that's affecting everything else, or do you see that fundamentally as a garnish on the salad, something maybe we ought to -- a nice to have, not an essential? >> you know, i think we need as a party to have -- i won't try to say his last name because i always butcher it myself -- i think we need john and bill need that wing of the party, but we also need realists that acted and thought and saw the world like we with did when we were in congress in the 1990s, when we controlled congress from '94 on where we believe inside a restrained foreign policy. .. as long as republicans have a coherent foreign policy, i think americans will go along with it. i think our bigger problem from the bush era came from the fact he's a big government republican. he came in with $155 billion surplus. when you left we had a tr
to the conservative viewpoint, whether it be on foreign policy and anti communism, economic conservative as some, constitutionalism or what today is called social conservatism more likely than can -- traditional conservatism. the issues were different and less clear back then but there has always been social conservatism. rusher had an important ally named frank meyer remains sufficiently respected and known among at least an older generation of conservatives that there is a frank meyer society in washington which i am going to be a group of conservative leaders who keep his memory alive. they are going to be meeting monday night and i will be speaking to them. meyer has been described by rusher as the intellectual engine of the conservative movement. he too was an ex-communist as burnham was. but meyer was a conservative activist. a passion that conservative activists. rusher even told me that meyer had once been a militant communist. rusher had been a militant republican, quote, they are not all that far apart except in what they believe. what rusher meant by that was he had it tremendous attr
the question. were you correct or incorrect when you said that the surge would be the most dangerous foreign policy blunder in this country since vietnam, were you correct or incorrect? >> my reference to -- >> the question is were you right or wrong. that is a pretty straightforward question. i would like you to answer whether you were right or wrong and free to elaborate? >> i'm not going to give you a yes or no answer. >> let the record show he refuses to answer that question. >> sean: and pretty unbelievable patrick j. buchanan and bill richardson. gentlemen, good to see you both. >> how are you doing? >> sean: pat, i was going back in time and few moments i was watching a cable news opinion show by the name of crossfire. does that bring back memories for you? >> i had to testify before the watergate committee. it brought that back to me. i think chuck is a patriot and he has an independent mind. i disagreed with him on the surge. i supported it. i said the iraq war and invasion and occupation and killing thousands and thousands of people to deprive it of weapons it did not even have, we
to a documentary, mobilely focused on reagan's foreign policy as it pertains to the soviet union and prevailing a 50-year cold war. >> yeah, in this case, it was all based on a comment from george schulze during our interview with schulze who said, and i'm more or less quoting that he felt that the reagan administration didn't make a lot of accomplishments in the middle east but at least things didn't go backwards. we decided to explore the notion of whether things actually went backwards. >> it's interesting that reagan as he was leaving the oval office, pat buchanan had said reagan leaving the oval office turned around and looked back right as george h.w. bush is being sworn in and went back to that day in lebanon and said that was the one day that he wished he could have had back. that was the low point of his remarkable presidency. >> well, yeah, and you're referring to the embassy or either the embassy bombing or the marine corps barracks bombing. >> the marine corps barracks. >> we get into a fairly serious way the birth of hezbollah in this film largely based on the kind of power vacuum
is very good in foreign policy and i think she will be -- i think this will help her in 2016. host: we go next to jeff in tupelo, mississippi. republican line. caller: good morning. how are you? host: fine, thank you. caller: she got sworn in, she looked good in the pictures, she flew around the world a little bit, and nothing that she has accomplished. i don't think our allies are real pleased with. our enemies in the past belief in the best predictor of -- i mean, future behavior is past behavior. the only thing that the real bad people in this world understand is force. i don't think talking to them and making nice-nice with them is going to do anything except emboldened them. host: you made a statement about our allies and their perception? could you expand on that? caller: well, the lead from behind strategy of this administration got two diplomats killed and three brave americans killed in libya. as far as her taking responsibility for that, what responsibility is it that she has actually taken? none she actually said to the american people what difference does it make now for that
is that republicans need to get right on foreign policy and that is a core issue that is affecting everything else? are you seeing it as a garnish on the salad? not essential. >> as a party, we need to have john and bill on that wing of the party. we also need those who acted and soggy world like we did -- and saw the world like we did in congress or we believed in a restrained foreign policy. that is part of the balance. did you go back and look at what william buckley said about iraq. he said it was not a conservative of venture. there's nothing conservative about believing that you're going to be able to change the way people live and think in other countries that do not have a democratic background. i think the bigger problem really has to duet the domestic side of things. as long as republicans have a coherent foreign policy, i think americans will go along with its. the bigger problem from the bush era came that he was a big government republican. we had $155 billion surplus when he came in. when you that we had a $1 trillion deficit. our national debt doubled. we had a seven million-dollar
the democrats lost power in 1980, i became completely responsible on foreign policy, completely. when they were in power, they had to deal with the soviets. carter was weak, but when the soviets invaded afghanistan, he had the boycott, the olympic boycott. and he toughened up. one of the things he proposed was that the germans had wanted the americans to develop a neutron bomb. but instead, carter didn't want to do that. so he proposed to put in germany and in britain short range -- medium-range nuclear weapons as an answer to the soviets who had put medium weapons in eastern europe. that was a carter administration policy. reagan comes in in 1981 and democrats completely collapse. >> i was a speechwriter in 1980. i had nothing to do with him in 1984. but he and gary hart ran together to see who was the first to have been forced the nuclear freeze, which was the stupidest idea in the history of the nuclear age. i joined the new republican in 1981 on inauguration by the way. i wrote an editorial denouncing the freeze as an illusion and deception, which incidentally caused the most canceled subsc
we believed in a restrained foreign policy. so that's part of the balance. you know, you go back and you look at what william buckley said about iraq and he said it wasn't a conservative venture because there's nothing conservative about believing you're going to be able to change the way people live and think in other countries that don't have a democratic background. those were buckley's words, not mine. i think the bigger problem, though, really has to do on the domestic side of things because, you know, republicans i think as long as republicans have a coherent foreign policy, i think americans will go along with it. i think our bigger problem from the bush era came from he was a big government republican. he came in, we had $155 billion surplus. when he left we had $1 trillion deficit. our national debt doubled. we had a $7 trillion medicare drug benefit plan that polls showed was a 50/50 proposition at best. george w. bush didn't veto a single appropriations bill. and we saw not only -- because when you say this and start going down the list, some republicans get defensive.
at the national committee on american foreign policy and editor of the bimonthly journal "american foreign-policy interests." he was also on the senior advisory group of the u.s. africa command, since its creation. and was vice president for the position of the study of the middle east and africa. let's hear more from the commander of u.s. africa command at howard university last week. [video clip] >> our mission is to protect america and american interests from threats that may emerge from the continent of africa. we see this manifest itself in somalia with al-shabab. in the maghreb in the sahara, as putting out now in mali with al qaeda in the lands of the islamic maghreb. ansar al din as well. in nigeria, the existence of boko haram. these organizations all focused on undermining the governments of those countries and establishing their own regime of control outside of legitimate government control. i am very concerned about each of those individual entities such as al-shabab and the others, it is increasingly the coordination, the synchronization of efforts of those different organizations th
policymaker are. that will be an issue if she runs in 2016. jon: he drives foreign policy. >> there is no question about that. there is no question about that. everybody concedes that and her allies concede it inside the administration. this is president obama's show and a she has been a spokesman an implementer of that policy. jon: paul gigot, from "the wall street journal". >> thanks, jon. jon: he will look at the week's top stories the "journal editorial report" airs tomorrow at 2:00 are eastern on the fox news channel. jenna: a massive deadly pileup yesterday on a michigan freeway. harris faulkner has the latest from the breaking news desk. >> reporter: the pictures from yesterday are simply eye-popping, a chain-reaction crash that left cars twisted and slipped more than a mile along interstate 75. this is detroit. we're learning more about what drivers were doing to try to stay alive during this. many slamming on their brakes. others swerving to avoid all the cars that were immediately piling up. that navy saved some lives we're told. still, three people died. among t
fighter jets to egypt. here is louie gohmert on "fox & friends." this administration's foreign policy. the foreign policy is, what difference does it make? hey, what difference does it make if we give our sworn enemies, people who want to wipe israel and us off the map, so we give them the method to wipe them out? what's the big deal? we're putting ourselves in jeopardy when we're sending jets and tanks to a man who a leader whose only two enemies he he said in the past are israel and the united states are resupplying our enemies with the means to fight us. the founder and president of the amaker islamic forum and philosophy. thanks for being on the show. >> thanks, clayton for having me. >> if you listen to the congressman. he makes it sound as if egypt is our sworn enemy right now. is that the case? and, if so, why are we sending them the numbers i see 16 f-16s and 200 abraham's tanks by the end of the year? >> >> it's pretty horrifying clayton that we are doing. this and goes beyond the weaponry this is about supporting ideology sworn against the united states, against the west, ag
street, perhaps a shift in foreign policy. >> steve: what else? >> it also says that the president is looking to people who he trusts. the thing about this president that needs to be understood is that he's willing to appoint people who may have opposed him. you have to realize he appointed hillary clinton. he appointed joe biden. now he has appointed john kerry. these are all people who ran against him for president. ray lahood is a republican. so the president will appoint people ho disagree with him, but at the same time, he wants people who he believes he can trust. look at dennis mcdonough who will be the chief of staff. he raised him up out of the national security council. >> steve: shower. what about some critics, and there is a picture right there. what about critics who say he's a control freak and he winds up getting rid of people who he's got a problem with? >> he's the president of the united states. he has to make the decisions ultimately. i dealt with the president on health care issue and frankly, he wouldn't budge. he had his opinion. he stayed with it. and ultimat
't usually think of as economic policy. immigration reform. i want to give you a few facts about immigrants and the american economy. first, about a tenth of the population is foreign-born, but more than a quarter of business started had a foreign-born owner. in silicon valley, half of all tech starts had a foreign-born owner. right now, about half of the doctors working in science and technology in america are foreign-born. immigrants are 30% more likely to get new businesses and three times more likely to file patents than their counterparts, on average, they tend to lift the american wages. the case is made by way of analogy. everybody gets, aging economies with low birth rates are in trouble. immigration is essential the importing of new workers, like raising the birth rate. but easier, because the newcomers are able to work immediately. you don't have to teach them to walk or eat with a fork. and in the u.s., they have an unusually amount to gain from the immigration, because when it comes to the global draft, we almost always get the first round picks. we do if we want them, and we ma
assistance from foreign countries to finance our government's reckless fiscal policies." he goes on to say -- "over the past five years, our federal debt has increased by $3.5 trillion to $8.6 trillion. that is trillion with a t. that is money that we have borrowed from the social security trust fund, borrowed from china and japan, borrowed from the american taxpayers. with over -- and over the next five years between now and 2011, the president's budget will increase the debt by almost $3.5 trillion." continuing to quote from senator obama in 2006, "numbers that large are sometimes hard to understand. some people may wonder why they matter. here is why. this year, the federal government will spend $220 billion on interest. that is more money to pay interest on our national debt than we'll spend on medicaid and the state children's health insurance program. that is more money than we pay interest on our debt this year than we will spend on education, homeland security, transportation and veterans' benefits combined. it's more in one year than we're likely to spend to rebuild the devastat
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 51 (some duplicates have been removed)